get_app_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' plus the enumeration makes the read-only nature and the return shape clear, which is valuable given there is no output schema. It says nothing about permissions/auth scope, rate limits, or behavior when an app has no editable state, so the disclosure is partial.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, then one dense enumeration sentence and a short actionable closing sentence. The breadth of the enumeration is justified because no output schema exists, though the first sentence is long enough to strain readability slightly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and one simple required parameter, the description compensates well by describing the returned entity structure and pointing to the update_* follow-ons. Missing only operational detail (auth scope, empty-state behavior) that would make it fully self-sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter (app_id) and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it as 'App Store Connect app ID'. The description adds no format, source, or sourcing guidance (e.g., where to obtain the ID) beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a precise verb+resource ('Get an app's App Information page') and then enumerates the exact payload: the app entity (primary locale, content rights) plus each appInfo with per-locale name, subtitle, privacy policy URL, categories and age rating declaration. This is specific enough that an agent can distinguish it from sibling reads like get_app or list_app_store_versions without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The closing sentence 'Use the returned IDs with the update_* tools' gives a useful follow-on workflow cue, which is real guidance. However, it never states when to call this instead of alternatives (get_app, list_app_store_versions) or what prerequisite conditions apply, so usage remains implied rather than explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.